I'm routinely disgusted by the football culture at american universities (or any sport really, or at least if it's like the school's major sport). the sheer number of rape allegations reported after a "football party" is just staggering. perhaps the only thing more disturbing than the number of rapes that go on at those parties is how many of those women who go to the university's health services center to get checked out end up recanting their statements. it's not a stretch to imagine the university is trying to protect their "star athletes". I do know that Paterno wasn't like that, though. He would suspend players for not meeting his (his, not the university's) acedemic standards or if any player is under investigation for drug use, underage drinking, sexual assault, weapon charges, vandalism, etc. He wouldn't allow players to have their names on their uniforms or put stickers on their helmets indicating sacks or tackles or touchdowns, or whatever the hell those things mean. He wanted everything to reflect a sense of integrity, respect, modesty, and fair play/ sportsmanship.

I'm just mentioning this because while I completely agree with you about sports culture giving a free pass to its players and most definitely the university itself is very guilty of this, Paterno didn't stand for it and actively worked for instituting stricter guidelines for player behavior and harsher punishments for violations._________________FormerlyGreen_Finn

I just finished reading the report by an independent panel commissioned by Penn State and headed by former FBI Director Louis Freeh.
Here are a few of the more salient facts:
- Penn State President Graham Spanier, Vice-President Gary Schultz, and Athletic Director Tim Curley are all giant douches.
- Sandusky's first witnessed act of molestation occurred in 1998. Those three mentioned above handled it internally, Paterno was aware something had happened but only got vague replies and was kept out of the loop, and when the PA district attorney declined to press charges the incident was buried, Paterno was told that everything had been settled and was never told what actually happened.
- Sandusky was caught again in 2001 and the assistant coach immediately told Paterno.
- Paterno then followed university procedure and informed Schultz and Curley.
- These two in turn told Spanier and the three went about making sure that no records of the 1998 incident remained.
- Paterno was not involved in any of the meetings those three held to discuss what to do and fully cooperate with the police investigation.
- The report did conclude that although he had broken no laws, he violated his moral responsibility to report it to the police, not just his supervisors. (Though it seems to be that the guy who actually witnessed the abuse and then just went and told his Paterno, who was his supervisor, really should have been the one responsible for calling the police. you know, an eyewitness report versus a secondhand account.)
- They also concluded that he should have been more aggressive in pursuing the matter after reporting it. He responded by saying that he didn't want to get in the way of the police investigation (obviously making the stupid assumption that Spanier had actually called the police. Oh, yeah, plus he was fucking 85 and had cancer.

Basically a lot of blame for not doing things better in hindsight, some bad judgement calls, etc. you know, those things humans do. But while they implicate him as possibly being a part of the cover-up conspiracy, they never actually found anything to back that up other than one of those three assholes saying that he put them up to it._________________FormerlyGreen_Finn

that's what I just don't get about anti-gay legislation and bans. pedophilia and homosexuality are two completely separate things. could a gay man molest a child? yeah, sure he could (though I can't recall ever hearing a story about it and you just know something like that would be paraded about to try to rally anti-gay support) but the fact is that, if this did happen, his homosexuality would be completely unrelated to his pedophilia. gay bans "for the safety of our children" is just a way to justify their homophobia.

Well, the argument, as outlined in that video, is that male pedophiles that rape and molest boys are gay. That's literally their starting point. This also ties into the kind homophobia that seems to go out from the argument that, as straight man, being sexually approached by another man is really preparation for sexual assault. In my opinion this has very much to do with rape culture.

So that kind of homophobia, in a sense, justifies rape. It's rapist logic that a man who is sexually attracted to other men will rape boys if he is put in a position, like Scout Leader, where that is possible. Because rapists thinks all men, deep down, are like them. Indeed, looking at it that way, there is a certain rationale in that argument in that in a rape culture making homosexuality more acceptable should also implicitly make homosexual rape more acceptable._________________A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want? ~Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

that's what I just don't get about anti-gay legislation and bans. pedophilia and homosexuality are two completely separate things. could a gay man molest a child? yeah, sure he could (though I can't recall ever hearing a story about it and you just know something like that would be paraded about to try to rally anti-gay support) but the fact is that, if this did happen, his homosexuality would be completely unrelated to his pedophilia. gay bans "for the safety of our children" is just a way to justify their homophobia.

I wasn't sure how best to respond to your post but I'll just do what I can.

Him wrote:

Well, the argument, as outlined in that video, is that male pedophiles that rape and molest boys are gay. That's literally their starting point.

This was the mindset of the "heterosepratist" that the guy in the video was disputing. A grown man being attracted to a young boy is not homosexuality, it is pedophilia. The sex of the two aren't what's important here, it's their ages.

Him wrote:

This also ties into the kind homophobia that seems to go out from the argument that, as straight man, being sexually approached by another man is really preparation for sexual assault. In my opinion this has very much to do with rape culture.

A straight man being approached by a gay man is in far less potential danger than a straight woman being approached by a straight man, so I just find everything about that offensive.

So that kind of homophobia, in a sense, justifies rape. It's rapist logic that a man who is sexually attracted to other men will rape boys if he is put in a position, like Scout Leader, where that is possible. Because rapists thinks all men, deep down, are like them. Indeed, looking at it that way, there is a certain rationale in that argument in that in a rape culture making homosexuality more acceptable should also implicitly make homosexual rape more acceptable.

This was the part I was having trouble parsing out what you are trying to say. Men who like men like men, not boys. That's the bottom line. the boy scouts does seem like a good place for a pedophile to target kids but by keeping out gays they are completely ignoring the real threat. America is also one of the only countries that hasn't integrated their scouting program yet. most scout programs around the world are co-ed; boy and girl scouts, male and female scout leaders. No one is getting up in arms that a straight adult male is probably going to molest one of the little girls because people recognize that just because a man is attracted to women doesn't mean he is attracted to little girls. It's no different for gay men.
Also: Lord Baden-Powell, the founder of scouting worldwide... yeah, he was gay.

by the way, I recognize that you don't necessarily share these opinions and you were just showing their perspective on this. and sweet naked jesus on a pegasus do I hope I'm right about that 'cause those are some fucked up notions there._________________FormerlyGreen_Finn

- The report did conclude that although he had broken no laws, he violated his moral responsibility to report it to the police, not just his supervisors. (Though it seems to be that the guy who actually witnessed the abuse and then just went and told his Paterno, who was his supervisor, really should have been the one responsible for calling the police. you know, an eyewitness report versus a secondhand account.)

...

Basically a lot of blame for not doing things better in hindsight, some bad judgement calls, etc. you know, those things humans do.

No. Educators are what's called mandatory reporters. If you are a mandatory reporter you're legally obligated to report anything you observe or even suspect to the police in a timely manner. Even if it's unrelated to your job. When I worked as a victim advocate for victims of violent crime I only worked with adults. If one of my clients had a child that for some reason I suspected was being abused I was required to report it. If I was in a supermarket and heard a kid say he was being abused I was required to report it. Paterno had the same obligation and failed to meet it, which may have endangered more children (either in reality or potentially)._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Ill do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

- The report did conclude that although he had broken no laws, he violated his moral responsibility to report it to the police, not just his supervisors. (Though it seems to be that the guy who actually witnessed the abuse and then just went and told his Paterno, who was his supervisor, really should have been the one responsible for calling the police. you know, an eyewitness report versus a secondhand account.)

...

Basically a lot of blame for not doing things better in hindsight, some bad judgement calls, etc. you know, those things humans do.

No. Educators are what's called mandatory reporters. If you are a mandatory reporter you're legally obligated to report anything you observe or even suspect to the police in a timely manner. Even if it's unrelated to your job. When I worked as a victim advocate for victims of violent crime I only worked with adults. If one of my clients had a child that for some reason I suspected was being abused I was required to report it. If I was in a supermarket and heard a kid say he was being abused I was required to report it. Paterno had the same obligation and failed to meet it, which may have endangered more children (either in reality or potentially).

Dogen is right. All educators are mandated reporters. If you don't report your job is gone. End of story. I've been involved with a couple reportings. It's not an easy thing to do, but you have to protect yourself._________________Eureka00: "Reminding you of your addictions" since 1982.

I didn't know about that law. So pretty much the assistant coach who witnessed it, Paterno who he told about it, and the 3 univ. admins who Paterno told were all obligated to inform the police and failed to do so. I admit that if that's the law then I can't really say much else about it.
I still don't believe he had any foreknowledge or was involved in a coverup.

"although he had broken no laws, he violated his moral responsibility to report it to the police, not just his supervisors." - that bit was paraphrased directly from the report though._________________FormerlyGreen_Finn

Also: Lord Baden-Powell, the founder of scouting worldwide... yeah, he was gay.

I just wanted to point out that Baden-Powell being gay is mostly speculation on the part of biographers (Notably Tim Jeal) and that there is widespread disagreement on the matter from a number of biographers._________________The Thirties dreamed white marble and slipstream chrome, immortal crystal and burnished bronze, but the rockets on the covers of the Gernsback pulps had fallen on London in the dead of night, screaming. - William Gibson, The Gernsback Continuum

- The report did conclude that although he had broken no laws, he violated his moral responsibility to report it to the police, not just his supervisors. (Though it seems to be that the guy who actually witnessed the abuse and then just went and told his Paterno, who was his supervisor, really should have been the one responsible for calling the police. you know, an eyewitness report versus a secondhand account.)

...

Basically a lot of blame for not doing things better in hindsight, some bad judgement calls, etc. you know, those things humans do.

No. Educators are what's called mandatory reporters. If you are a mandatory reporter you're legally obligated to report anything you observe or even suspect to the police in a timely manner. Even if it's unrelated to your job. When I worked as a victim advocate for victims of violent crime I only worked with adults. If one of my clients had a child that for some reason I suspected was being abused I was required to report it. If I was in a supermarket and heard a kid say he was being abused I was required to report it. Paterno had the same obligation and failed to meet it, which may have endangered more children (either in reality or potentially).

Dogen is right. All educators are mandated reporters. If you don't report your job is gone. End of story. I've been involved with a couple reportings. It's not an easy thing to do, but you have to protect yourself.

Heck, CAMP COUNSELORS are mandatory reporters. We've had this drilled into our head for the camp we volunteer at. If we suspect something could be wrong, we have to report it. Camp's actually a common place, apparently, for evidence or confessions of abuse to come out, since they're A) Away from family, B) With adults that are in some strange way, also like their peers. They feel slightly more comfortable. C) They're out of their normal routine, which can throw whatever coping/repressing mechanisms they've developed out of whack._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

Yeah, unfortunately I've been put into that situation twice before. I allude to it briefly a few pages back, though in a different context. I don't know why I didn't put the to situations together other than being irrationally defensive of a family friend who I don't believe did anything wrong with malicious or selfish intent, not that that is necessarily required for guilt. But anyway, like I mentioned before, I knew the guy and it is starting to affect me personally so while you're all welcome to continue this discussion I will be recusing myself. so really, I guess what I'm saying is:

that's what I just don't get about anti-gay legislation and bans. pedophilia and homosexuality are two completely separate things. could a gay man molest a child? yeah, sure he could (though I can't recall ever hearing a story about it and you just know something like that would be paraded about to try to rally anti-gay support) but the fact is that, if this did happen, his homosexuality would be completely unrelated to his pedophilia. gay bans "for the safety of our children" is just a way to justify their homophobia.

I wasn't sure how best to respond to your post but I'll just do what I can.

Him wrote:

Well, the argument, as outlined in that video, is that male pedophiles that rape and molest boys are gay. That's literally their starting point.

This was the mindset of the "heterosepratist" that the guy in the video was disputing. A grown man being attracted to a young boy is not homosexuality, it is pedophilia. The sex of the two aren't what's important here, it's their ages.

Him wrote:

This also ties into the kind homophobia that seems to go out from the argument that, as straight man, being sexually approached by another man is really preparation for sexual assault. In my opinion this has very much to do with rape culture.

A straight man being approached by a gay man is in far less potential danger than a straight woman being approached by a straight man, so I just find everything about that offensive.

So that kind of homophobia, in a sense, justifies rape. It's rapist logic that a man who is sexually attracted to other men will rape boys if he is put in a position, like Scout Leader, where that is possible. Because rapists thinks all men, deep down, are like them. Indeed, looking at it that way, there is a certain rationale in that argument in that in a rape culture making homosexuality more acceptable should also implicitly make homosexual rape more acceptable.

This was the part I was having trouble parsing out what you are trying to say. Men who like men like men, not boys. That's the bottom line. the boy scouts does seem like a good place for a pedophile to target kids but by keeping out gays they are completely ignoring the real threat. America is also one of the only countries that hasn't integrated their scouting program yet. most scout programs around the world are co-ed; boy and girl scouts, male and female scout leaders. No one is getting up in arms that a straight adult male is probably going to molest one of the little girls because people recognize that just because a man is attracted to women doesn't mean he is attracted to little girls. It's no different for gay men.
Also: Lord Baden-Powell, the founder of scouting worldwide... yeah, he was gay.

by the way, I recognize that you don't necessarily share these opinions and you were just showing their perspective on this. and sweet naked jesus on a pegasus do I hope I'm right about that 'cause those are some fucked up notions there.

Yeah, just to be clear it's not *my* views, I'm just trying to explore the connection between homophobia and rape culture._________________A cigarette is the perfect type of a perfect pleasure. It is exquisite, and it leaves one unsatisfied. What more can one want? ~Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

Yeah, unfortunately I've been put into that situation twice before. I allude to it briefly a few pages back, though in a different context. I don't know why I didn't put the to situations together other than being irrationally defensive of a family friend who I don't believe did anything wrong with malicious or selfish intent, not that that is necessarily required for guilt. But anyway, like I mentioned before, I knew the guy and it is starting to affect me personally so while you're all welcome to continue this discussion I will be recusing myself. so really, I guess what I'm saying is:

THIS ENDS NOW!

Is it time for fuzzy animals or baked goods?

In other topics, I was looking up transgender in google news to prepare for a lecture me and my partner give every few months. Usually it is nothing but murders and rape and misgendering/transphobia and people debating whether I should be allowed to pee.

But not this time. Two pages in, and all I'd come across were properly written articles about trans people doing cool things and non-trans people being supportive. I decided not to dig any further, because I wanted to spend a day in the universe where transphobia touches nobody._________________::lesser crisis mode::

CHICAGO (AP)  From the time they are born, we put our boys in blue beanies and our girls in pink ones. It's a societal norm, an expectation even, that you just are what you are born  a boy or a girl.

From early on, we divide toys and activities by very distinct gender lines, with superheroes and trucks and muck on one side and princesses and dolls and all things frilly on the other.

Many children land, enthusiastically, on the expected side. Others dabble in both "girl" and "boy" things. But what if your kid, even from an early age, mostly showed interest in doing opposite-gender things? More importantly, what if they wanted to BE the opposite gender  or a less-defined mix of both? And what if they wanted to test those limits in public places, like school?

Would you let them?

It's not, of course, that pat of a process. Parents don't just decide to let their kids switch genders. But, whether parents are dragged through the process, or if they decide to work it through more openly, more kids are challenging the boundaries of traditional gender, and going public at younger ages.

And they are doing so with the guidance of a growing faction of medical experts who no longer see this as something to be fixed. Last year, the American Psychiatric Association removed "gender identity disorder" from its list of mental health ailments.

Some experts predict that views on gender will evolve in much the same way they have for sexual orientation, since homosexuality was removed as a mental illness nearly four decades ago. Today, the gender spectrum includes those who are transgender, who see themselves as the opposite gender, and those who are gender variant, or gender nonconforming, whose gender is more "fluid." For kids, it means they identify part of themselves as boy and part as girl.

"Now these kids . are beginning to have a voice . and I think that's what's been making things interesting and challenging  and difficult, sometimes  depending on the family, the kid, or the school," says Dr. Robert Garofalo, director of the Center for Gender, Sexuality and HIV Prevention at Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago.

While the numbers are relatively small, it means that, increasingly, schools are having to figure out how to accommodate them, some more successfully than others.

The questions often start with the basics: Which bathroom do they use? Where do they change for gym class? What if teachers or students don't want to use the pronoun, "he" or "she," or a new name the student prefers?

It can be difficult, and uncomfortable. In Colorado, for instance, the parents of a 6-year-old transgender girl are suing their school district for trying to make her use a separate bathroom.

The center at Lurie opened recently, in part, to meet the demand from parents seeking guidance for children who are questioning their gender identity and to provide support to older transgender youth who sometimes struggle more in adolescence, even facing a greater suicide risk, especially if they have no backing from family and others around them.

The center also serves as a resource for schools with transgender and gender variant students.

Increasingly, those students are making the transition as early as elementary school, if not before.
___

Ryan, a fourth-grader in suburban Chicago, is one of those kids.

Most people, upon seeing her big blue eyes, long lashes and flowing blond hair, would never know she's anything but a girl. But underneath, she is still physically a
boy.

Doctors call that gender variant, though Ryan prefers to call herself a "tomgirl."

"I feel that I'm a girl in my heart," she says, "and a boy in my brain."

Her parents allowed her to be interviewed and also agreed to speak to The Associated Press on the condition that the family's last name, the name of the town where they live and the school Ryan attends not be used in the story.

Though the decision to publicly express publicly as a girl happened at the end of kindergarten, Ryan had slowly been becoming "she" at home for a long time, even when she still had a crew cut.

Six months after her second birthday, her parents say Ryan was drawn to all things pink and sparkly. Ryan, the boy, wore pajama pants on his head, pretending it was long hair, or acted out girl roles from movies.

"I'm wishing . for the one I love . to find me!" the preschooler would enthusiastically sing into the toilet, copying Snow White, who sings into the echoing wishing well in the animated Disney movie.

By kindergarten, Ryan would bolt through the door of the family's suburban Chicago home, leaving a trail of boy clothes up the stairway  then quickly changing into a skirt and matching T-shirt.

Ryan's parents, initially told that Ryan had gender identity disorder, tried to get their child more interested in traditional boy things. But Ryan preferred chasing butterflies instead of footballs. Her dad scheduled extra "father-son" time, thinking that might have an influence. But nothing changed.

They decided to stop resisting and allowed Ryan to start taking small steps into the outside world, at a nearby park, for instance, where she wore her girl clothes.
For her kindergarten Halloween party, Ryan dressed as a princess and, shortly after, asked her parents to refer to her as "she," a request to which they agreed, though it took a few months to adjust.

Their first support came from a pediatrician who specialized in gender, as well as other parents with children like Ryan, many whom they met through an online listerv. They are, as they call themselves, "affirming parents."

"There's a realization that it's not a phase or something that's ending when the preschooler gets to kindergarten," says Kevin Gogin, the program manager for school health programs at the San Francisco Unified School District, which recently added a transgender category in student health surveys. The survey found that 1.6 percent of high school students and 1 percent of middle school students identified as transgender or gender variant. Elementary students weren't in the survey, but Gogin says the district has seen more young transgender and gender variant students, too.